The Two-Edged Nature of Diverse Action Costs
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Diverse action costs are an essential feature of many real-world planning applications. Some recent studies have shown that diversity of action costs makes planning more difficult, and that searching using unit action costs can outperform searching the same domain with diverse action costs. In this paper, we provide experimental evidence and theoretical analysis showing that search can also benefit from action cost diversity. We show that on several IPC problems cost diversity has a positive effect (reduces search effort). We then present a theoretical analysis establishing that these positive cases are not accidental. Our main result is a "No Free Lunch" theorem showing that any negative effects of cost diversity are always perfectly counterbalanced by positive effects. Our theoretical analysis also shows that it is advantageous to have a strongly concentrated distribution of solution costs. In many domains, unit costs will give rise to a more concentrated distribution than diverse costs, but we give an example typifying domains in which the opposite is the case.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it